MADD campaingning to erradicate drunk driving entirely

[Vic]

Has MADD become like PETA?

 

[SoftwareEng]

Whoever opposes this is a selfish dick with no friend or relative, and with no concern for other people's safety and well-being.

Now, it's different if the device has a 50% failure rate and thinks I'm drunk half the time.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Vic
Has MADD become like PETA?

What do you mean become? They've been this way for a long time. Who do you think pushes the continual lowering of BAC limits? Technology is just starting to catch up with their insane lust for authoritarian control over people.

 

[Slick5150]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Amused
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

driving is not a right its a privilege........ next.........

So, you're my Mom from when I was 16?

 

[psydancerqt]

just another way to control everyone.

 

[SoftwareEng]

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Amused
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

driving is not a right its a privilege........ next.........

So, you're my Mom from when I was 16?

no, your mom was way hotter :heart:

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: SoftwareEng
Whoever opposes this is a selfish dick with no friend or relative, and with no concern for other people's safety and well-being.

Now, it's different if the device has a 50% failure rate and thinks I'm drunk half the time.

Can I sign you up for a hard drive screening as well? You haven't got any kiddie porn to hide, so you wouldn't mind me browsing your computer?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Vic
Has MADD become like PETA?

What do you mean become? They've been this way for a long time. Who do you think pushes the continual lowering of BAC limits? Technology is just starting to catch up with their insane lust for authoritarian control over people.

Yeah, I've always felt the lowering of BAC limits made no sense given that almost all drunk driving accidents occur at high BAC levels. This is a solid lesson I guess that emotionally bitter people should not be allowed to gain control over the rest of us, no matter how sorry we feel for their losses.

 

[vi edit]

I'd just rather see some sort of effective punishment/deterrent implemented. I don't know....ship your ass to Iraq or something.

The drunk who killed my uncle was on his 6th DUI and driving on a suspended license. He got booked for 12 years and was out in 6.

How many strikes does it take before "you're out". I think we talk a mean talk about cracking down on DUI's but I know so many people with them and they just laugh about it. It sucked for a couple months and it cost a couple grand in lawyer fees, but after that they just keep on doing what they were doing.

At my last workplace, I had a team of 8 people with a collective DUI count of 6.

Since our prisions are overpopulated, just ship them off to the military for a couple years after their first conviction and see how things change.

 

[Slick5150]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
http://www.suntimes.com/news/commentary/145842,CST-EDT-edits22a.article

i think they should really push for this technology to be mandatory in all cars like a seat belt and airbags

There is a thing in this country where when you're innocent of doing something, you shouldn't have to pay a penalty for it. I don't drink & drive, and I don't want to have to blow into some device just to start my car.

Besides, those things don't work right half the time. A colleague of mine had to put one in his car, and half the time it just plain doesn't work and he can't go anywhere.

So thanks, but I'll pass

your logical is totally flawed here. If you are accused of rape as a man in this country your credibility and reputation is ruined and tarnished for the rest of your life whether or not you are found guilty. Accusation is all it takes. This is just one example of many where innocence doesn't mean you don't pay a penalty.

But you're argument is that we should all have to prove our innocence everytime we want to do something, which is contrary to everything our legal system was founded upon.

I don't have a problem using these devices for habitual offenders (provided they make them work better), but installing them in every car is just ridiculous.

 

[Linflas]

Even Candy Lightner thinks MADD is out of control and she was the force behind its establishment.

Ms. Lightner left MADD in 1984 and disagrees with its change in goals. The organization "has become far more neo-prohibitionist than I ever wanted or envisioned," she says. "I didn't start MADD to deal with alcohol. I started MADD to deal with the issue of drunk driving."

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: SoftwareEng
Whoever opposes this is a selfish dick with no friend or relative, and with no concern for other people's safety and well-being.

Now, it's different if the device has a 50% failure rate and thinks I'm drunk half the time.

If people actually wanted these things, car manufacturers would put them in cars without being forced by any law.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
http://www.suntimes.com/news/commentary/145842,CST-EDT-edits22a.article

i think they should really push for this technology to be mandatory in all cars like a seat belt and airbags

There is a thing in this country where when you're innocent of doing something, you shouldn't have to pay a penalty for it. I don't drink & drive, and I don't want to have to blow into some device just to start my car.

Besides, those things don't work right half the time. A colleague of mine had to put one in his car, and half the time it just plain doesn't work and he can't go anywhere.

So thanks, but I'll pass

your logical is totally flawed here. If you are accused of rape as a man in this country your credibility and reputation is ruined and tarnished for the rest of your life whether or not you are found guilty. Accusation is all it takes. This is just one example of many where innocence doesn't mean you don't pay a penalty.

And that's a good thing? You'd like to expand the idea of guilty until proven innocent? And I thought I'd seen all manner of fascists around here. This guy takes the cake.

Well we make everyone get car insurance in most states don't we? Thats not to protect you its to protect the other guy same principle here.

 

[Vic]

Meh. I've often wondered if it might be more effective if we legalized DUI, but then make the punishment eye-for-an-eye for any DUI-related incident. Sure... go ahead and drive drunk... but if you kill someone, you're getting charged with capital murder and heading for the chair. Given that the most serious DUI incidents are usually caused by the same old repeat offenders, this might make more sense than our current enforcement methods (which obviously don't work to satisfaction).

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: SoftwareEng
Whoever opposes this is a selfish dick with no friend or relative, and with no concern for other people's safety and well-being.

Now, it's different if the device has a 50% failure rate and thinks I'm drunk half the time.

If people actually wanted these things, car manufacturers would put them in cars without being forced by any law.

hardly anyone knows these exist. I only recently found out about it.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
http://www.suntimes.com/news/commentary/145842,CST-EDT-edits22a.article

i think they should really push for this technology to be mandatory in all cars like a seat belt and airbags

There is a thing in this country where when you're innocent of doing something, you shouldn't have to pay a penalty for it. I don't drink & drive, and I don't want to have to blow into some device just to start my car.

Besides, those things don't work right half the time. A colleague of mine had to put one in his car, and half the time it just plain doesn't work and he can't go anywhere.

So thanks, but I'll pass

your logical is totally flawed here. If you are accused of rape as a man in this country your credibility and reputation is ruined and tarnished for the rest of your life whether or not you are found guilty. Accusation is all it takes. This is just one example of many where innocence doesn't mean you don't pay a penalty.

But you're argument is that we should all have to prove our innocence everytime we want to do something, which is contrary to everything our legal system was founded upon.

I don't have a problem using these devices for habitual offenders (provided they make them work better), but installing them in every car is just ridiculous.

I don't have children but I'm forced to do with child saftey locks on my medicine and house hold chemicals. JUST RIDICULOUS!

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Vic
Meh. I've often wondered if it might be more effective if we legalized DUI, but then make the punishment eye-for-an-eye for any DUI-related incident. Sure... go ahead and drive drunk... but if you kill someone, you're getting charged with capital murder and heading for the chair. Given that the most serious DUI incidents are usually caused by the same old repeat offenders, this might make more sense than our current enforcement methods (which obviously don't work to satisfaction).

That's my take on it too. Sadly though, our death penalty process is so cumbersome that after the 42 appeals and piles of red tape it takes to process, that person could be rotting away on taxpayer dollars for a good decade before he takes the walk.

 

[B00ne]

Wow I just checked some statistics - the US sure seems to have a problem with alcohol related fatalities: 39% of all.

Actually, fatalities are quite high in the US in general especially considering the speed limits

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Amused
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

driving is not a right its a privilege........ next.........

So, you're my Mom from when I was 16?

find me any legal document that says driving a car/truck/train/boat is a right.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: Vic
Meh. I've often wondered if it might be more effective if we legalized DUI, but then make the punishment eye-for-an-eye for any DUI-related incident. Sure... go ahead and drive drunk... but if you kill someone, you're getting charged with capital murder and heading for the chair. Given that the most serious DUI incidents are usually caused by the same old repeat offenders, this might make more sense than our current enforcement methods (which obviously don't work to satisfaction).

That's my take on it too. Sadly though, our death penalty process is so cumbersome that after the 42 appeals and piles of red tape it takes to process, that person could be rotting away on taxpayer dollars for a good decade before he takes the walk.

why go through all that BS wasted tax dollars, tying up court resources etc....just don't let it happen in the first place.

 

[Slick5150]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Amused
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

driving is not a right its a privilege........ next.........

So, you're my Mom from when I was 16?

find me any legal document that says driving a car/truck/train/boat is a right.

Find me a legal document that says using your computer is a right.

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Slick5150

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Amused
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

driving is not a right its a privilege........ next.........

So, you're my Mom from when I was 16?

find me any legal document that says driving a car/truck/train/boat is a right.

Rights are those found in the constitution

*thumbs through the constitution*

Nope, nothing. You're right, IcebergSlim.

 

[vi edit]

why go through all that BS wasted tax dollars, tying up court resources etc....just don't let it happen in the first place.

Because it will still happen.

People are just going to buy a beat up junker for $500 cash doesn't have these things in place and use that as their "bar beater" to get them back and forth.

You really have no clue just how easy it is to circumvent processess.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: B00ne
Wow I just checked some statistics - the US sure seems to have a problem with alcohol related fatalities: 39% of all.

Actually, fatalities are quite high in the US in general especially considering the speed limits

It all depends on what an "alcohol related fatality" actually is. If 2 stone cold sober drivers have an accident where one of them ends up careening into a pedestrian walking out of a bar after finishing a beer and kills him that counts as an "alcohol related fatality" in special interest group statistics land.

 

[montypythizzle]

its your car you bought it it may be an option someday....